home

Prosecutorial Misconduct Causes Reversal of Murder Conviction

Sometimes prosecutors say the worst things about defendants or their counsel during closing argument. Once in a while, an appeals court pays attention.

In a stabbing case that resulted in a second degree murder conviction in Maryland, here's what the prosecutor, then-Assistant State's Attorney Rex Gordon, said in rebuttal after the defense lawyer in closing pointed out discrepancies between the state witness' trial testimony and his prior statement given to police.

"I want you to remember that if any one of you . . . witness a murder and wound up sitting in that witness chair nine or 10 months later, some defense lawyer, somewhere in that trial, would be standing in front of a jury, making the snide and condescending and obnoxious comments about you."

Lynch's objection was overruled, and Gordon continued: "It is just their stock in trade. It is what they do when their client is guilty and there is no defense."

The court's ruling: Gordon's comments attacking defense attorneys as a group were an improper appeal to the prejudices of the jurors. Result: Conviction overturned, new trial ordered.

< Big Crime Drop in New York With Fewer Incarcerations | Michael Ware Reporting From Iraq >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    he would've been ok if........................ (none / 0) (#1)
    by cpinva on Sat Nov 25, 2006 at 12:12:55 AM EST
    he'd pointed out that time does tend to make memories not 100% accurate. on the other hand, if his witness was testifying 180 from his statements to the police, then he had nothing, and should have just shut up.

    let's see, new trial: cost to the TP's, 1,000's

    new trial: cost to the defendant, 1,000's

    slap on the wrist to the then-ASA: cost to the TP's, 1,000's

    cost to the then-ASA: -0-

    in fact, i'm guessing he went off to a firm, and is billing out at 2-300 an hour. perhaps the state should bill him, and original trial judge, equally, for the cost to the TP's of MD for a re-trial that should never have happened?

    whatcha think?

    When the prosecution blows it... (none / 0) (#2)
    by Bill Arnett on Sat Nov 25, 2006 at 02:27:54 PM EST
    ...why the heck would they or the judge have to pay for retrial?

    Justice is a matter of societal imperative for which society bears the cost.

    The minute we require private persons to pay for a mistake justice makes we become vigilantes and nothing more.

    I refer to criminal justice, not civil where the imposition of costs on the losing party reimburses the costs of the prevailing side's attorney. Even there if judges were made to pay costs, no one would allow themselves to be appointed to the bench anymore.